bornadog
27-02-2013, 11:26 AM
Link (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/afl/gambling-act-bites-dogs-plan/story-fnca0u4y-1226586372129)
AN equalisation concept proposed by the Western Bulldogs to impose a luxury tax on gaming machine profits appears to have been scuttled just days after its release.
In its equalisation paper submitted to the AFL -- under the apt heading Catch-up Footy -- the Dogs want a more even and fairer distribution of all club and AFL profits.
In the paper, the Bulldogs requested a radical change to the way AFL clubs were financed in the future, including a massive across-the-board increase in football department funding by the league and a luxury tax on poker machine revenue.
But, after making inquiries to the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation, The Australian was told sharing of gaming profits might be considered illegal.
A spokesperson for the VCGLR said yesterday The Gambling Regulation Act 2003 states that a venue operator must not enter into, or be a party to, a "prohibited venue agreement".
"A prohibited venue agreement is an agreement, arrangement or understanding entered into by a venue operator under which the venue operator provides to another person, as consideration, an amount calculated by reference to its gaming machine revenue," the VCGLR said.
"The Western Bulldogs proposal that Victorian AFL clubs should contribute a certain percentage of profit from their poker machine revenue to a common pool for equitable distribution may be considered such an agreement."
The VCGLR is an independent government statutory body charged with maintaining and improving public confidence in the integrity of sports with regard to their betting environment. It also can withdraw licences to operate gaming machines and force the removal of key officials if it finds an organisation has acted inappropriately.
The authority said it recommended that venue operators seek their own legal advice on the interpretation of the gambling law and how it applied to this proposal.
The Dogs could be left red-faced by the gambling act as one of their strategies for equalisation was a redistribution of a pokies tax, which they prefer to an AFL equalisation option of taxing clubs on football department spending above a certain figure.
"The growth in scale and dependency on poker machine revenue in (most) AFL clubs and the growing revenue differentials between larger and smaller Victorian franchises in this area have been to the detriment of the competition," the Dogs' submission says.
The Bulldogs wanted a system in which poker machine profits over a certain proportion of gross club revenue could be contributed to a common pool for equitable distribution.
Bulldogs chief executive Simon Garlick said last night: "That option is one of a number of options in the paper. While there are some potential hurdles, if it was embraced, I'm sure there could be ways and means to revisit the act."
Garlick said his club earned a profit last year of $300,000 from its two venues with pokies.
Carlton is understood to have made in excess of $4.5 million from five venues last year. Several other Victorian clubs last year made more than $3m from their gambling venues.
Western Bulldogs president Peter Gordon said his club carried an accrued debt of about $7m and argued that it was tougher for the less wealthy clubs to get into business markets outside those generated by football. The Bulldogs emphasised their submission was for the good of the game.
AN equalisation concept proposed by the Western Bulldogs to impose a luxury tax on gaming machine profits appears to have been scuttled just days after its release.
In its equalisation paper submitted to the AFL -- under the apt heading Catch-up Footy -- the Dogs want a more even and fairer distribution of all club and AFL profits.
In the paper, the Bulldogs requested a radical change to the way AFL clubs were financed in the future, including a massive across-the-board increase in football department funding by the league and a luxury tax on poker machine revenue.
But, after making inquiries to the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation, The Australian was told sharing of gaming profits might be considered illegal.
A spokesperson for the VCGLR said yesterday The Gambling Regulation Act 2003 states that a venue operator must not enter into, or be a party to, a "prohibited venue agreement".
"A prohibited venue agreement is an agreement, arrangement or understanding entered into by a venue operator under which the venue operator provides to another person, as consideration, an amount calculated by reference to its gaming machine revenue," the VCGLR said.
"The Western Bulldogs proposal that Victorian AFL clubs should contribute a certain percentage of profit from their poker machine revenue to a common pool for equitable distribution may be considered such an agreement."
The VCGLR is an independent government statutory body charged with maintaining and improving public confidence in the integrity of sports with regard to their betting environment. It also can withdraw licences to operate gaming machines and force the removal of key officials if it finds an organisation has acted inappropriately.
The authority said it recommended that venue operators seek their own legal advice on the interpretation of the gambling law and how it applied to this proposal.
The Dogs could be left red-faced by the gambling act as one of their strategies for equalisation was a redistribution of a pokies tax, which they prefer to an AFL equalisation option of taxing clubs on football department spending above a certain figure.
"The growth in scale and dependency on poker machine revenue in (most) AFL clubs and the growing revenue differentials between larger and smaller Victorian franchises in this area have been to the detriment of the competition," the Dogs' submission says.
The Bulldogs wanted a system in which poker machine profits over a certain proportion of gross club revenue could be contributed to a common pool for equitable distribution.
Bulldogs chief executive Simon Garlick said last night: "That option is one of a number of options in the paper. While there are some potential hurdles, if it was embraced, I'm sure there could be ways and means to revisit the act."
Garlick said his club earned a profit last year of $300,000 from its two venues with pokies.
Carlton is understood to have made in excess of $4.5 million from five venues last year. Several other Victorian clubs last year made more than $3m from their gambling venues.
Western Bulldogs president Peter Gordon said his club carried an accrued debt of about $7m and argued that it was tougher for the less wealthy clubs to get into business markets outside those generated by football. The Bulldogs emphasised their submission was for the good of the game.